If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

imported post

Greetings all,

I am new to the OC thing and I'm looking to pick up my first wheelgun. I've always been a semi-auto kinda guy, but I'm in the market for a revolver that I can make into a BBQ gun and also use for some target shooting. I like .357's, so I can use .38s to make small groups in paper. Looking for a large, heavy gun, 5+ inch barrel, with adjustable sights. This will be somewhat of a project gun, so grips, etc. aren't terribly important as I'll probably replace them soon anyway. The most important criteria is accuracy. I'm looking for something in the $500-$800 range, and I'll be shopping for used guns once I decide on a model.

I know next to nothing about revolvers so I'm really looking for some advice on brands, models, accuracy, and overall quality.

If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.

imported post

I guess I forgot to add, I'd like to avoid S&amp;W and Ruger because of their complicity with the Clinton administration and the AWB. I'm not opposed to buying them used, but new is out of the question.

imported post

If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.

imported post

S&amp;W does not have the same ownership that made the deal with the Clinton administration and the current ownership of S&amp;W has publicly denounced the prior deal, has stated they think the contract is unenforcible and that they will fight it actively in court if the gov't ever tried to enforce it. The only member of upper management that was at S&amp;W during that deal who is still with the company to the best of my knowledge, was one of the people who resigned from S&amp;W in protest over the deal and then was rehired after the new ownership took over.

To punish the current ownership (an American company) and the employees of S&amp;W for the sins of the prior owners (a British company) years after the fact and in the face of current ownership's denouncement of the prior owner's actions to be unfair at best. S&amp;W makes excellent quality revolvers (as attested to by my fully functional, still shoot-it-on-occasion nearly 100 year old S&amp;W revolver in my collection) and I would not at this point hesitate to purchase a new one from them.

Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

S&amp;W does not have the same ownership that made the deal with the Clinton administration and the current ownership of S&amp;W has publicly denounced the prior deal, has stated they think the contract is unenforcible and that they will fight it actively in court if the gov't ever tried to enforce it. The only member of upper management that was at S&amp;W during that deal who is still with the company to the best of my knowledge, was one of the people who resigned from S&amp;W in protest over the deal and then was rehired after the new ownership took over.

To punish the current ownership (an American company) and the employees of S&amp;W for the sins of the prior owners (a British company) years after the fact and in the face of current ownership's denouncement of the prior owner's actions to be unfair at best. S&amp;W makes excellent quality revolvers (as attested to by my fully functional, still shoot-it-on-occasion nearly 100 year old S&amp;W revolver in my collection) and I would not at this point hesitate to purchase a new one from them.

I was unaware of that... thanks for educating me. I had to dig a bit just to check into what you said. S&amp;W should put some money into publicizing that information, it would probably give them a big boost, as I am not the only one who is (was) still boycotting S&amp;W based on old (mis)information.

imported post

essayons wrote:

deepdiver wrote:

S&amp;W does not have the same ownership that made the deal with the Clinton administration and the current ownership of S&amp;W has publicly denounced the prior deal, has stated they think the contract is unenforcible and that they will fight it actively in court if the gov't ever tried to enforce it. The only member of upper management that was at S&amp;W during that deal who is still with the company to the best of my knowledge, was one of the people who resigned from S&amp;W in protest over the deal and then was rehired after the new ownership took over.

To punish the current ownership (an American company) and the employees of S&amp;W for the sins of the prior owners (a British company) years after the fact and in the face of current ownership's denouncement of the prior owner's actions to be unfair at best. S&amp;W makes excellent quality revolvers (as attested to by my fully functional, still shoot-it-on-occasion nearly 100 year old S&amp;W revolver in my collection) and I would not at this point hesitate to purchase a new one from them.

I was unaware of that... thanks for educating me. I had to dig a bit just to check into what you said. S&amp;W should put some money into publicizing that information, it would probably give them a big boost, as I am not the only one who is (was) still boycotting S&amp;W based on old (mis)information.

No problem. That's why we are here, to learn and share information. S&amp;W soon after the purchase did do some publicity about their positions in opposition to the prior ownership even publishing a few open letters but it didn't get the grass roots distribution that the original deal get which is unfortunate for S&amp;W. It seems that people much prefer outrage to vindication.

Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

imported post

I know William B. Ruger sold us out years ago but he is dead. I have three Rugers I have a SP101 327, GP100 357, and Mark II 22/45, I think they make the best gun out there. I could understand if they still were selling us out.

imported post

I just bought a used Ruger GP100, 4 in, it was in excellent cond. I paid $375, so in comp to new I would say thats not a bad price for a Smith. I love a wheel gun, its my primary carry, I carry two speed loaders on my belt as well enjoy.:celebrate